He cheated a little and his behavior was punished twice on the same date and by two different judges, one of them also saw an extra offense. HE Supreme Court He revoked the prison sentence of up to six months for fraud given to a woman who was investigated and prosecuted by two different judicial bodies in Madrid, who was sentenced to another sentence on the same day.
The decision that El Periódico de España from the Prensa Ibérica group had access to was dated 22 December and its rapporteur was the Magistrate. Miguel Colmenerothe purpose of such investigations, which are of a very exceptional nature,that prevails over the last sentence, the real truth and with it material justice rather than form”.
In this particular case, the woman was found to have been convicted of a minor bank fraud in two different judgments, both delivered on November 22, 2021.
HE Criminal Court No. 23 of Madrid condemned him 6 months in prison already Compensating BBVA with 3,000 Euros for a perpetual fraudulent charge; if it’s another body on the same day, 16. High Criminal Court The capital gave a slightly higher penalty to those who added the crime of forgery of official documents to the previous crime.
In this case, the Criminal Chamber, in agreement with the prosecutor, decided to annul the decision of the Court no. . .
This is the decision resulting from a procedure initiated after Court 16. According to the prosecution, the Court was only convicted of “fraud” in 23 cases.The most correct decision of the 16th High Criminal Courtfrom continuing crimes Lies and fraud in official documents. In addition to all this, the 16th judge had already decided to suspend this sentence while the double decision issue was clarified.
The Supreme Court adds that there has been a clear violation in this case. bis in idem ban, legal principle that prohibits a defendant from being punished twice for the same events. This principle, as the resolution reminds, ” the necessary balance between the requirements of justice and the demands of legal certainty”.
Thus, the facts declared proven in both decisions will be examined and their identities will be verified. For this reason, it is appropriate to accept the appeal for examination and to cancel the second sentence given.”